Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[Syegfryed]

She-hulk is another show and another scenario, there is stuff there that i enjoyed even if it was bad, its guilty fun, i have no problem or shame to say i liked something that was bad, i liked early seasons of The flash in CW, but im not a hypocrite and can see how bad she-hulk and the flash were, and i can call out/criticize when there is shit on it.

Rings of power is another level of awfulness, and the enjoyment about RoP is not in watching (cause i would never watch this shit again) but in making fun of it, discussing how bad it was, and how could be better, and see how desperate people can get to defend the indefensible

- - - Updated - - -

Not quoting cause mmochampion is fucked on chrome, and i can't quote or edit comments for some reason.

[rhorle]

Rings of power is another level of awfulness, and the enjoyment about RoP is not in watching (cause i would never watch this shit again) but in making fun of it

So it is about not letting go. You get enjoyment out of hating on it. Lol.

[Syegfryed]

So it is about not letting go. You get enjoyment out of hating on it. Lol.

Its just cathartic, and again, is fun to engage with other people to make fun of it, you can call all you want but there is no rules against it so we are going to keep doing it

tip: If people didn't try to defend the shit things that happened, this thread would be way more empty.

[rhorle]

tip: If people didn't try to defend the shit things that happened, this thread would be way more empty.

It is crazy how you are blaming those who don't hate the show. If those who didn't like the show stop discussing it then this thread would have way less posts. You can't actually find something that you enjoy to be cathartic? Why is it that you imply you, and others, can only find relief when hating on something.

- - - Updated - - -

I am angry and I'm ok with being angry. Let's say every week someone was sneaking into the Louvre and destroying a painting. Fine arts critics would want to know what was destroyed, and they would be upset about it. That's kind of how I feel about this series.

The amusing part is you are the one sneaking in every week in your example. The first season was over months ago and yet here you are still actively participating in something that makes you angry. Why not let go and finding something that doesn't make you angry?

[Dhrizzle]

I am angry and I'm ok with being angry. Let's say every week someone was sneaking into the Louvre and destroying a painting. Fine arts critics would want to know what was destroyed, and they would be upset about it. That's kind of how I feel about this series.

Well that's just daft. It's more like someone made a diorama based on the Mona Lisa and you're constantly crying about how much you miss the painting despite it still hanging in the Louvre and millions of prints existing all around the world.

- - - Updated - - -

Its just cathartic, and again, is fun to engage with other people to make fun of it, you can call all you want but there is no rules against it so we are going to keep doing it

tip: If people didn't try to defend the shit things that happened, this thread would be way more empty.

The thing is that only works if it's utterly irredeemably rubbish and that's not how it turned out, hence we've had pages of people desperately trying to ignore the fact that it was considered successful and plenty of people enjoyed it.

[Syegfryed]

The thing is that only works if it's utterly irredeemably rubbish and that's not how it turned out, hence we've had pages of people desperately trying to ignore the fact that it was considered successful and plenty of people enjoyed it.

No, it was a failure. And not, there is no plenty on that.

no matter if it made 15th position in a top 15th that only cover the US views, i know some people like to think that USA is the bellybutton of the world, but isn't, it is a failure of a show.

And that is why they are going to push back more one year and replace shit, because it was a dumpsterfire

[bledgor]

No, it was a failure. And not, there is no plenty on that.

no matter if it made 15th position in a top 15th that only cover the US views, i know people that like in the USA think they are the bellybutton of the world, but they aren't, and it is a failure of a show.

And that is why they are going to push back more one year and replace shit, because it was a dumpsterfire

Ignore the drones, they are little better than bad AI made by amazon. Like you said no one is coming to this thread to discuss amazing scenes like in other show/movie threads, or are hyping up about potential moments coming in the future seasons. Instead you get mockery of scenes like Galadriel getting REALLY excited riding a horse, the terrible sword training with the Numenoreans, or the "I HAVE A TEMPEST WITH ME!"/"Give me the meat and give it to me raw" lines.

If it were just a random/new franchise I will admit the dialogue is bad enough I might get the same enjoyment out of it that I got out of The Room.

[Dhrizzle]

No, it was a failure. And not, there is no plenty on that.

no matter if it made 15th position in a top 15th that only cover the US views, i know some people like to think that USA is the bellybutton of the world, but isn't, it is a failure of a show.

And that is why they are going to push back more one year and replace shit, because it was a dumpsterfire

Point well proven :-)

Just checking checking though - you do know the top 15 Nielsen reports isn't just out of 15, right? They track all the shows in that category and just show the top 15. Think of music charts, a song that sits at number 10 in the top ten hasn't come last out of a group of 10 songs, it's also beaten all the other songs that didn't make it I to the top 10.

[Syegfryed]

Point well proven :-)

Just checking checking though - you do know the top 15 Nielsen reports isn't just out of 15, right?

do you also know they are only counting streaming only stuff right? thats why House of the dragon isn't there, and is also only counting original stuff, AND only for us numbers, do you also realize that right?

:^)

[Dhrizzle]

do you also know they are only counting streaming only stuff right? thats why House of the dragon isn't there, and is also only counting original stuff, AND only for us numbers, do you also realize that right?

:^)

Yes, I know the chart is for comparable products in their primary market.

[Syegfryed]

I see we're now on the "real fans didn't enjoy this, nobody did, just white knights" delusion now. Classic.

Quote the part where someone said anything about real fans.

Such discussion gets bombarded with, dare I say, "hate drones" until it is thoroughly chased away.

Prove it.

Show the discussions where people were discussing the amazing things that happened in the show, the ones they were rly hyped about it, and show people "bombarding then" and "chasing then away"

Oh, of course you won't find that, because that is once again you making stuff up, pretending to have moral highground

Some of you are just deeply maladjusted individuals. .

Projecting much?

[Triceron]

Where are the complaints over gatekeeping 'real fans' coming from? I see this being mentioned time and time again but like... No one has ever said this?

[Fabinas]

Point well proven :-)

Just checking checking though - you do know the top 15 Nielsen reports isn't just out of 15, right? They track all the shows in that category and just show the top 15. Think of music charts, a song that sits at number 10 in the top ten hasn't come last out of a group of 10 songs, it's also beaten all the other songs that didn't make it I to the top 10.

The show, quality wise, was SHIT. CRAP. Irredeemable Garbage.

The fact that some parts were nice or ok (Durin/Elrond, CGI) does not alter the above. Which is clearly my opinion, but i will keep voicing it, anyway, whether you like it or disagree.

Also, the fact that it hit Nielsen's Top 15 for most minutes viewed in Streaming is an objective fact that noone can deny. ALso that it can be used from Amazon as a leverage for the show's success, should they wish to do so.

But the latter fact has nothing to do with the former.

Stop conflating stuff.

[rhorle]

no matter if it made 15th position in a top 15th that only cover the US views, i know some people like to think that USA is the bellybutton of the world, but isn't, it is a failure of a show.

So every show of 2022 that didn't get 14 or higher was a failure? The mental gymnastics that you, and others, keep using is hilarious. You say you are only talking about the show to "make fun of it" yet you keep lying to yourself about it at the same time. You can make fun of it and acknowledge its success. It really does show how you are hating just for the sake of it at this point.

- - - Updated - - -

Ignore the drones, they are little better than bad AI made by amazon.

Pure copium. People that don't hate as you do have to be AI made by Amazon. Lmao.

- - - Updated - - -

do you also know they are only counting streaming only stuff right? thats why House of the dragon isn't there, and is also only counting original stuff, AND only for us numbers, do you also realize that right?

House of the Dragon would be on the streaming charts. Only it's streaming portion is tracked because it is a top 15 list of streaming shows. Why would you expect non-streaming shows to be tracked? You are essentially complaining that in the Olympics swimming is a failure because they don't include sprinting in medal considerations.

US only doesn't matter because it still shows the show was an overwhelming success in the US. Plenty of things are not world wide hits but are still successful shows.

- - - Updated - - -

Amazon has apparently been spending huge money on tv shows for years. Before this thread I haven’t really heard of any of these except Sneaky Pete and Jack Ryan. They must have lost a huge amount on prime video so far.

Why would they have lost money when producing shows with "normal" size budgets? Does every TV company lose money? Besides we know from the leaks that is false because Amazon considers to have made money on a lot of their series based on internal metrics. Netflix does the same thing and has made a profit most of the time. There really is no difference in this regard between Prime Video and Netflix. Netflix has a few 100+ million productions that didn't do well.

You are blinding yourself to facts here by your desire to hate on the Rings of Power. It isn't a failure just because you didn't like it despite your best efforts to rationalize that.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Where are the complaints over gatekeeping 'real fans' coming from? I see this being mentioned time and time again but like... No one has ever said this?

From the last couple pages.

Saying people aren’t fans because Tolkien isn’t in there portfolio

first off, it's categorical fact that these 'superfans' are not in anyway shape or form 'Tolkien fans', not only is their entire portfolio of content devoid of ANYTHING relating to middle earth, in the instance of the 'straight black girl social justice warrior', she put a video on instagram where she was asked the question 'are you gonna watch rings of power?' and she said that she was having too much fun watching house of the dragon and that if she had time/felt like it, she would wait until rings of power had fully released and binge it then, leaving off with: quote: 'rings of power is gonna need to do something special if it's gonna beat house of the dragon hahahahaha'.

Saying there are no fans who liked the show.

Personally it’s a great place for me to connect with other Tolkien fans who also hated the show. Haven’t yet met one who truly liked it.

But it’s gotten sidetracked by the white knights.

[rogoth]

From the last couple pages.

Saying people aren’t fans because Tolkien isn’t in there portfolio


Saying there are no fans who liked the show.

so let me get this straight, you don't need any previous knowledge of the source material, or produce any content on any social media platform surrounding said source material to be considered a 'superfan' of said source material?, well that's good to know, consider me a 'superfan' of *insert any fucking franchise here* even though i might not have ANY KNOWLEDGE of what the actual plot is or the characters therein, because apparently according to you, you don't need any underlying knowledge to be considered a 'superfan' of anything it seems.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

so let me get this straight, you don't need any previous knowledge of the source material, or produce any content on any social media platform surrounding said source material to be considered a 'superfan' of said source material?, well that's good to know, consider me a 'superfan' of *insert any fucking franchise here* even though i might not have ANY KNOWLEDGE of what the actual plot is or the characters therein, because apparently according to you, you don't need any underlying knowledge to be considered a 'superfan' of anything it seems.

Depends on how you want to define “superfan”.

But to be a fan in “anyway shape or form” no you don’t need to post on social media at all or produce any content even if you are an “influencer”, nor do you need to have any previous knowledge of the Silmarillion to be a fan of Tolkien as you said even in that post they could know about his work through the Jackson movies.

[Triceron]

From the last couple pages.

Saying people aren’t fans because Tolkien isn’t in there portfolio


Saying there are no fans who liked the show.

One is a comment about how fake the 'superfans' in the promo were, the other is an anecdote of how a person doesn't personally know people who truly enjoyed the show. I don't see how this results in actively complaining over gatekeeping that isn't actually happening.

If someone doesn't think the people in the promo were real fans, then that'a their own opinion. If someone doesn't recognize anyone personally having enjoyed the show, that is their own experience. That isn't being broadly applied to anyone here. As I said, I don't see where this gatekeeping is happening.

[Lorgar Aurelian]

Yeah, neither of those are comments relating to 'real fans' that would be considered offensive to anyone.

One is a comment about how fake the 'superfans' in the promo were, the other is an anecdote of how a person doesn't personally know people who truly enjoyed the show. I don't see how this results in actively complaining over gatekeeping that isn't actually happening.

who said any thing about offence? You asked for examples I provided.

One is about how the “super fans” and says they aren’t Tolkien fans in “anyway shape or form” because there not posting on social media about his works and the other is about how this thread is great to meet Tolkien fans and how none of said fans liked the show, IE all the posters who liked the show and have been posting about Tolkiens works and how they enjoy them don’t fall into fans.

Both are gate keeping rather that gate keeping is “offensive” or not.

Superfan' is specific to what Amazon decided to call their own promo influencers. It isn't a definition that is being applied outside that context, like to any Tolkien fandom or group of fans. How I understand it to be, no one is using Superfan outside thr context of the promo, and all criticisms of Superfans is exclusive to the promo.

Not sure why anyone would be upset about gatekeeping if it's not happening.

Amazon says there super fans, others say they aren’t fans at all, people are gonna define “super fans” differently then Amazon who could just means “fans in our promo”.

That’s why I said it depends on how you define it, to me “super fans” mean nothing, others how ever are clearly upset that Amazon would use the term and apply it to people they don’t see as fans at all.

[Triceron]

Everything I said in my initial post is something that was said very few posts before it. While I no longer really participate in the thread much, I still read it. I suggest also reading before replying.

Maybe that is the problem, you're reading too much into it.

- - - Updated - - -

Amazon says there super fans, others say they aren’t fans at all, people are gonna define “super fans” different the Amazon who could just means “fans in our promo”.

That’s why I said it depends on how you define it, to keep “super fans” mean nothing others how ever are clearly upset that Amazon would use the term and apply it to people they don’t see as fans at all.

And I don't see how anyone should have a problem with that regardless. It isn't being applied to people who watch the show who aren't influencers in the promo. The context is solidly placed at Amazon and this promo.